hmm....no I didn't do anything. is the lock priority decided by OS not
the DB? I'm confused here. B/C/D started several mins later than A here
while the update statement takes no more than 1 second. of coz there
are hundreds of connections trying to acquire the lock during that
time.
于2011年12月22日 0:09:17,Kevin Grittner写到:
Rural Hunter<ruralhunter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I still have this question:
same statement A,B,C,D update same row. The start order is
A->B->C-D. From what I've gotten, B/C/D got the lock before A.
Why did that happen?
Did you do anything to prevent it from happening? If not, the OS
scheduler is going to give time to one process or another in a
fairly unpredictable way.
-Kevin
--
Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin
